#1 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Andrew - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
POSTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
In response to your posting on the no left turn signs that benefit friends and family of elected official in Lisle Township, I would have to gracefully disagree. I live on one of the corners where the no-left turn signs are located and I am also part of the neighborhood community that works with Lisle Township and Mr. Dow on traffic issues in this remote unincorporated part of Lisle Township.
We have a major traffic problem on Chase and Elinor. During peak traffic periods, cars traveling northbound coming from Woodridge make left turns onto College and go down to the light at Maple & Walnut. We want to discourage traffic traveling on these routes. The streets are rural streets and are not wide enough for two cars to pass one another. During the mornings, school buses pick up kids at these corners and there are no sidewalks for them to walk on.
So the idea to put up no left turn signs would make the cars go straight to Maple, where there are no lights to turn at. This in effect would discourage drivers from coming North on these roads and instead head South to 63rd St. Our next step as a neighborhood is going to be speed bumps and possible closure of Elinor and Chase at 59th St.
Secondly, Commissioner Dow is our elected official who respresents us on the Township Council. He does not have family in this area. However, we are his constituents and we elect him to do his job of supporting this community. Our neighborhood has worked with him many times in the past on stopping various neighborhood rezonings and annexation into Downers Grove & Woodridge.
Lastly, in response to your statment of creating hazardous traffic problems, I believe that statement to be incorrect. Like I said, I live on one of the roads that has the no left turn sign and I have not seen any accidents where the signs are located. I believe you're probably talking about hazardous conditions turning onto Maple without a light. If this is what you are considering hazardous, then maybe the no left turn signs are working and you should try going down to 63rd St. to get to work instead, as that would be less hazardous.
Andy
#2 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - Woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
POSTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Andrew, thanks for your opinion.
You cannot control where people drive there cars on public roads. What is happening is the signs are being ignored by most people and, the others are simply driving in someones driveway and turning around. People are finding out trying to make a turn on maple at rush hour is next to impossible.
By erecting these ridiculous signs the people in Lisle township have greatly increased there liability in the event an accident occurs at Maple avenue. I suggest you read up on township recommended practices.
Myself any many of my neighbors have lived in this part of Woodridge for many years and, we take the train downtown. We are not about to change our route to the train station.
We in Woodridge do not appreciate you and your neighbors cutting thru our streets. There is an obvious double standard here.
#3 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
POSTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
For starters, you do not live in a 'remote' unicorporated part of Lisle Township. You live next to a 500+ unit apartment complex and, 100+ unit townhouse development. Not to mention adjacent to a major tollway. Face it, you live in a VERY HIGHLY populated area. The Lisle Township has let you down by allowing this unabated developmnt to go on in your community. Putting these signs up is not going to solve any problems. What will solve the problem is widening the roads and putting in sidewalks.
I will make a guess you do not work any longer and remember the good ole' days when this was a quiet 'rural' area (that was 30+ years ago -!!). Those days are gone.
#4 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: John - Califon (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
POSTED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006
I don't even live out there and can tell that the no left turn sign install is a no brainer. Anything that can lessen the incident of an accident-consequently not creating more as you allege-by directing traffic to follow the flow rather than going across a lane of opposing traffic flow is easily the best option.
#5 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Jeff - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
To Andrew - I live in Belmont Park and am sick and tired of the cut through traffic and the speeding. Both of these issues create a dangerous condition on our streets daily. Since you live in Woodridge, you probably take Hobson to Chase to College. The idea of the "no left turn" signs is to get people to use Belmont and Maple as opposed to our side streets. I also find it hard to believe many people from the Belmont park neighborhood cut through Woodridge.
Maybe if people drove in a civilized manner, ther wouldn't be such an uproar. I am much more concerned about the safety of my family and of my neignbors than I am about somebody having to change their route slightly. I would think you would feel the same way if the situation were reversed. You are welcome to sit on Chase/College and observe the problem first hand, maybe your opinion will change.
I myself would gladly change my route to accomodate a dead-end. After all, Chase was a dead-end at one time. The only reason any sort of hazardous situation has been created by the "no left turn" signs is that people refuse to use the main streets. If People would just use Maple and Hobson where there are street lights, there would be no problems. Those people chose to put themselves in that postion. Jeff - Belmont park
#6 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Jeff - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
I believe I made a mistake, my response regarding traffic in Belmont Park was to Philip, not Andrew. Also to say Mr. dow is part of some sort of conspiracy is absurd. He recognizes a dangerous situation is is trying to rectify it. I appreciate his efforts, as do all of my neighbors! Keep it up Mr. Dow. Jeff
#7 Consumer Suggestion
AUTHOR: Andrew - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
To Phillip, thanks for your opinion. Because College, Chase and Elinor are rural roads, they are not built for the capacity that currently exists on them. Until our little unincorporated area is annexed into Downers or Woodridge, this area will continue to have vary narrow streets, no sidewalks for children, and storm drainage problems. The 500+ apartment complex you speak of is not part of the problem. They are part of the city of Lisle and have city streets, sidewalks and have a light at Maple. The streets that are of concern are Chase, Elinor and College. We do live in a very populous area, however like I said our transportation network is designed for rural traffic.
What these signs are intended to do is to change your driving habits to the train station. Why doesn't your neighborhood try going to Hobson and then to the light on Belmont? I have lived here for 3 years now and commute to Naperville. I also have to deal with these signs. Being a father of a small child and having 150+ cars traveling down my road during a two hour morning period makes me worry. It is not safe for the kids going to the bus stops and sooner or later something bad is going to happen.
#8 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
You knew when you moved to the area there were narrow streets and no sidewalks. Why would anyone with children move to an area with no sidewalks -?? The people who have lived in the area 25+ years are not responsible for your poor decisions. We will not alter the routes we drive to work in the morning.
It is funny to see the fuzy-logic of someone who says why don't 'YOU' try and go this way or, that way, etc.... Believe me if the situation was reversed you would be the first people to scream about it.
Whether the signs stay or go makes no diference since the signs are being ignored or people are just turning around in your driveways. What you should be aware of is the much greater liability your township has taken on. If a serious traffic accident occurs at Elinor/Maple your township will bear a much greater liability due to the signs. Mr Dow has done a great dis-service to you and your neigbors.
#9 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Andrew - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
Phillip, I actually moved to this neighborhood before I had a child, but enough about me. You keep making assumptions and speculations about me, well I have some of my own about you. You keep talking about Lisle Township will be liable. Liable for what? If someone has an accident at Maple and Elinor? You sound like you're a trial lawyer who works for a firm downtown.
Sice you've lived here for 25 years I'm guessing you do not have kids or they are grown, which is why you ignore the real issue of why these signs are being put up in the first place. There is too much traffic for our 10' wide streets. There is not enough room for kids to walk to the bus stop without having to move over into a ditch everytime a car drives by.
There are 5 differnt school buses that stop at Elinor and College every morning. I'm also going to assume that you wish an accident would happen so that you can help them file a suit against Lisle Township and put the blame on these signs. However the blame would actually be on the driver of the car since they made a conscious decision not to take a less congested route to their destination.
We as a neighborhood know that these signs are not working like we would like, which is why we are investigating alternatives. Hopefully by next spring we'll have a different alternative to curb this Woodridge traffic flow issue.
#10 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - Woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
Andrew,
There are a number of associations for Township officials you can research this easily on the internet.
One of the primary duties of your township officials is Risk Management. Yes, any good attorney will have cause to seek damages from the township in the event of a serious accident at elinor/maple. The signs effectly prevent motorists from going to the only controlled intersection (walnut/maple). This goes against EVERY logical traffic management principle. You better believe ANY attorney will have a field day with this in the event of personal injury.
The fact is you have accepted this risk and are getting little or no benefit from the signs. I know Mr Dow has been contacted by Woodridge & Downers Grove officials. They are professional city managers who are extremely knowledgeable in traffic management issues. These towns are totally against the posting of these signs. Mr Dow needs to work with these towns to come up with a workable solution. I suggest at the next lisle township meeting in January you make this suggestion.
My personal suggestion is you put up some kind of turning restrictions during the evening rush hour and, get rid of the morning restriction. After 20+ years of driving to/from the train I can tell you there is more traffic in the aftrnoon than in the morning. Also in the summer more people are jogging/riding bikes in the afternoon than they are 6:30-9:30am.
Bottom line is we all live in close proximity to each other. Before the signs were put up Mr Dow should have consulted with Woodridge & Downers Grove.
#11 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Jayne - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
POSTED: Thursday, November 30, 2006
Phillip,
I whole-heartedly agree with your statement that the streets (Elinor/College/Chase) are public and that the public has the right to use them, but to a certain point. The government creates a traffic plan which designates streets for high, medium, and low traffic use. And then they try to develop those streets for their intended purpose of supporting traffic flow. Residental side streets are meant to be used by those who live in the surrounding neighborhood as a way to get out of their area and connect to medium and higher traffic paths.
Our streets (Belmont Park area) are not intended for cut thru traffic - people who want to avoid waiting at lights. Elinor/College/Chase are designated side streets that are being over-used and should not be revamped to accomodate more traffic, since Belmont and Maple are one block away. I believe that the government recognizes the designation of our streets as low traffic and is trying to curb their over use. Also with rights come responsibilities. The public is supose to adhere to the Stop signs, the 25 MPH speed limit (not 45 MPH), and now the No Left Turn signs.
Do not blame our neighborhood or Lisle Twnshp for this situation that has been created. It is the self-absorbed actions of many (ignoring the rules and being inconsiderate of others) who ruin it for all of us. Your statement of disregarding the current "No Left Turn" signs and pulling into people's driveways to turn around only reinforces my point. To those who do this - you will be further aggrevated by the sherif who will give you a ticket for this if you are caught - and believe me, our neighborhood is watching for repeat offenders. I commend Com. Dow for his efforts. The signs are only the beginning of the standard "traffic calming" process that governemnts use.
I would suggest that those who take these streets adhere to ALL the signs - or you many indeed find the next steps in this process even more inconvenient (speed humps, one ways, dead ends). Your comments of creating an unsafe situation and holding the township liable are completely absurd and I find it hard to reply to illogical statements - except to say that if the driver isn't obeying the rules, he is most likely at fault. I would like to know your address so that the residents of our neighborhood can drive down your street at 50 MPH, ignoring all posted signs, and (free of charge) we will throw in the occasional 1:00am radio blaring and garbage dumping on your property. Again it is the inconsiderateness of many that ruin it for everyone.
Jayne
#12 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - Woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, December 01, 2006
POSTED: Friday, December 01, 2006
What does garbage on your property,1AM car radio's,50mph speeding have to do with no left turn signs -?? You are the text book example of WHY your township needs guidance from professional City Managers.
Traffic management -should- be based on sound principles not the whim of a few headcases.
#13 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Jeff - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, December 01, 2006
POSTED: Saturday, December 02, 2006
Philip- you are the headcase. You are up in arms because you may have to slightly change your route for the safety of many, including yourself. Your argument for the Township being liable is ridiculous. If that's the case then they are assuming way more laibility with the current dangerous traffic situation in Belmont Park than they ever would with the slight possibility of somebody sueing the Township for putting up a "no left turn sign" in, which they have done for safety reasons. If you drive in a civilized manner, even if you have to wait for an opening on Maple, there should be no issue. So an any accident would be solely the responsibility of the driver. What about somebody turning left onto Maple off of Lomond, could they sue the Township as well? At that rate anyone could sue the Township. Secondly, you said you disregard the signs anyway, so which is it. You say you've lived here for 25+ years and somehow that's supposed to be relavent, yet you say 30 years ago was "the good ole days". Sounds like you're part of the "good ole days" yourself. There are many new people in this neihgborhood and things are going to change for the better. Widening the streets and sidewalks may help pedestrian safety, but they are not the answer to the misuse of our streets from cut-through traffic. Downers Grove has already recognized that there is a problem, as we as a neighborhood have met with them on more than one occasion. They agree that there is too much traffic traveling at to high of speeds. Good luck making an argument that since you refuse to take main streets such as Belmont, there is a safety issue. That's areal weak argument. I believe the only reason blaring radios and trash were mentioned is because there does seem to be an overabundance of inconsiderate people with no concern for others traveling through our neighborhood. I think we are all very frustrated. You make statements as if you know a lot, yet I think most of your statements are merely silly opinions with no facts behind them. What 100+ townhome complex are you refering to? Maple Woods is just over 50 units, not that that is much better. It sounds like you are just plain stubborn, you would rather put yourself in harms way than take a safe route? You can complain all you want, but there is much more support for safer, calmer roads than there is for someone possibly being slightly inconvenienced. Hopefully next time you disobey that "no left turn "sign you get nailed. I take it you disregard the stop signs and the speed limit because they are an inconvenience as well? Jeff
#14 Consumer Comment
AUTHOR: Jayne - Downers Grove (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, December 01, 2006
POSTED: Friday, December 01, 2006
Phillip,
The point I was trying to make and actually stated twice in my previous comments is that it is the self-absorbed and inconsiderate actions of many that ruin things for all of us. These streets are over-used by people who don't live in the area and have no care for it(upward of 500 to 1000 cars a day) and this brings with it other undesirable behavior.
The No Left Turn signs were to discourage people from passing thru this neighborhood who tend to speed while they do it. The signs are only for peek morning "rush hour" traffic - not all day. It is during this time that traffic tries to use these back roads to save time so to get to work on time.
I find it interesting that you did not have a rebuttal to my comment that is truely at the heart of this issue. It is the government that establishes the traffic plan, develops the streets according to this plan, and then trys to enforce the traffic flow according to the plan as well.
Basic traffic studies were performed on these streets by the government and based on the results it is the government who has determined that there is validity to the residents' concerns.
This is the last time that I will be reading and posting to this site, as I have better things to do with my time than to argue with someone who just doesn't get it. I'm sure at some point others will get tired of trying to reason with you as well and then you'll just be talking to yourself.
Jayne
#15 Update By Author
AUTHOR: Philip - Woodridge (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, December 02, 2006
POSTED: Saturday, December 02, 2006
Based on the comments of jeff n' jayne I commend mr dow for putting up with all of you.
Whatever you pay mr dow is surely not enough.
Signs,speed-bumps,deadends, stoplights, walls,
barb-wire, guard-houses, booby-traps. Please go ahead do all of the above.
merry christmas to all and to all a good night.
Ps- enjoy yourself on this websight, i'm done.
